How would you like VAR to work?

[Indy 3,283]

Lots of us all think VAR is not working and should be scrapped, but that looks very doubtful, so how would you like it to worK.

For me:

Offside.....

1, only to be judged on the feet, if any part of the attacking players foot is in front of the last defender then he’s offside, no other part of the body is considered.

2, accidental hand ball is just that for either side and an indirect free kick is awarded only.

3, accidental handball during build up play not blown for at the time will not be considered should a goal result from that passage of play.

4, a penalty kick should be a dead ball kick, player misses or is saved the keeper gets a goal kick to start the play, no rebounds.

5, all red cards to be reviewed.

6, if the ref sees the tackle and deems it a yellow then it’s not reviewable.

7, if a foul is not given at the time of play by the referee then no review, it’s still the referees call.

Thats about all I would like to see, I don’t want every play reviewed by third party sitting in an office, all reviews done by referees at the game.

Anyone like to add thoughts?

Edited January 20, 2020 by Indy

[Cantiaci Canary 556]

ONLY use it to check if a player has dived in the opponent's box ... and only then by the on field ref on a screen pitch side.

 

We had less drama about everything else before VAR was introduced.

Football is poetry not an equation ...

[HertsCanary93 222]

Perhaps controversial... but in my opinion the only major issue with VAR is the draconian enforcement of the offside rule - where the technology is not up to the task of deciding decisions to the mm.

[Matt Juler 148]

1 hour ago, HertsCanary93 said:

Perhaps controversial... but in my opinion the only major issue with VAR is the draconian enforcement of the offside rule - where the technology is not up to the task of deciding decisions to the mm.

I agree, offside is the main issue.  There needs to be an allowable tolerance so that goals such as Pukki's against Spurs are not overturned.

 

[Branston Pickle 3,633]

For me the main thing is the offsides, they are trying to make line decisions to the mm where the ‘input’ information isn’t fit for that purpose.  Some leeway is needed, an ‘X’cm zone infront of the striker or something else that removes this ‘error’...imo if it is that close, all offside line decisions should favour the striker.  We go to games to see goals, not 5 minutes of pissing about with replays to show someone’s armpit was 2mm ahead of the defender.

Re: The handball thing for goals, I’m perfectly happy with the rule: even If accidental, if the advantage is that you go onto score, it feels too big a gain.

We certainly don’t want to feel the game’s being reffed by replay, in some studio/box a couple of hundred miles away, like we did in the Man U home game.

 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Never wanted it in the first place. Goal line technology is great. But the rest of controversy is just part of the game. The officials are just as important as the players on the day and they will make the odd mistake.

But to keep pointing out how fallible they are is annoying. I would like the media to stop showing replays, particularly in super slow motion and having the stupid debate that emanated from the disallowed goal for Liverpool when Van Dijk was alleged to have fouled De Gea is one of the reasons. Why we need so many ex greats (all failed managers) to analyse everything we see ourselves is baffling to me.

Fact is, everyone gets a bum deal now and again. Suck it up, that's life and football.

[kick it off 1,948]

I'd use it much like the NFL where they've had it for 10+ years.

1) Offside - Line drawn on the pitch from defenders foot, ref reviews it at pitchside. None of this nonsensical trigonometry with inaccurate data. Multiple camera angles. If it's not clear and obvious one way or the other then the ruling on the field stands as originally called. Agree with your thoughts that it's judged by the feet of the attacker, but I would say the attacker has to have a foot in front of the defenders foot. If there's no daylight then it's not offside. Stop all this mm nonsense once and for all.

2) Accidental handball should stay as it is in terms of the outcomes but the rule itself needs to be changed. If it is blasted from 2 yards away, I don't care where his hand is, it isn't handball.

3) All penalties awarded automatically subject to review at pitchside.

4) Encroachment is irrelevant unless the encroaching player touches the ball. Penalties saved round the post or cleared by a non-encroaching player do not result in a re-take.

5) Only person who makes decisions using VAR is the Ref using a pitchside monitor. The twats in the layby can do one.

6) All red cards are subject to automatic review at pitchside.

7) Refs to have the guts to overturn their own decisions.

[curious yellow 184]

Keep the rules as they were and have a limited appeal system as in tennis. 

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,017]

Yes.......

[Badger 2,405]

"Clear and obvious" would cover most of it, but for some reason, they have moved away from this in implementation. Anything that takes more than 2 or 3 angles and frame by frame break-down is not "clear and obvious."

"Referees call" (similar to cricket) - Accept that the rules are there to prevent certain types of action and that at times open to interpretation, where the referees opinion should be given the benefit of any doubt - presumption that his decision is correct unless can be quickly overruled. No ridiculous lines being drawn for offside - the rule is there to prevent attackers from gaining unfair advantage and doesn't need to be measured in millimetres. 

VAR only implemented by decision review system (DRS). One review per half carried forwards if correct review - if wrong, it's lost and no more for the half. Instead of shouting from the sidelines, the manager would have to back his judgement or shut up. 

[Grumpy 122]

The VAR decisions that are being made, are by qualified EFL officials so they should just confirm or overturn decisions by match officials.Not by using lines and judging to the enth degree but just by what, in their professional opinion, the decision should be based on the evidence that they can see on the replays.

 

 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Grumpy